Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Daniel_Stuckey writes "Bam! For anyone that's paid a speck of attention to the tedium of political redistricting, which happens while a state grows unevenly, (and must dynamically respond to density, electorate disparity, natural resources and ridgelines, etc.), this is straight out of some psychedelic dream. For Democrats, it could be straight out of a nightmare. That's because Freeman's map necessitates 50 equally populous United States. His methods for creating the map are explained thusly:

"The algorithm was seeded with the fifty largest cities. After that, manual changes took into account compact shapes, equal populations, metro areas divided by state lines, and drainage basins. In certain areas, divisions are based on census tract lines... The suggested names of the new states are taken mainly from geographical features."

The new 50 states would be equally potent in terms of voting, but how many would be red? I made this layered GIF of Romney vs. Obama by county to try and figure things out."Link to Original Source

Equal sized states only change the Senate, and you could fix that easy enough by changing the Senate's voting system so that each Senator casts the votes from his election; it could be the votes that Senator won, or all the votes cast in his election, including opponents. I kind of like only the votes cast for the Senator himself, since it encourages them to win as many votes as possible, but that's a small matter.

Or if you are set on changing state / district size, let border property parcels change state

UK constituencies are redrafted every so many years to try to keep members of Commons House of parliament with equal constituents. It causes many problems as each government tries to adjust boundaries to ensure a "safe seat" for its party . Latest proposals 2012 not accepted by house so next possible adjustment in 5 years time. The geopgraphy is not redone. The boundaries of the political constituencies are redrawn - they do not necessarilly align with shires or county sub divisions of the country. I see no

No winner takes all elections for president. The electoral college is multiplied by 100, so a state that currently has one electoral vote, now has 100, while a state with 21, now has 2100. With fully proportional allocation.So winning 50,1% of Texas votes or 80% have a huge difference in the electoral college.All states with large population become important, cause getting a few % more of the vote will make some difference.